I must object to I think he needs to look into the situation and learn the facts.
There are privately-owned and properly licensed spay/neuter clinics in our state that provide the services at about the same cost and sometimes below the cost of the nonprofits that are not in compliance with the Practice Act of the State of Alabama. These Alabamian, privately-owned clinics and their veterinarian owners answer to the State Board of Medical Examiners. There is no oversight, nor regulation of the nonprofits, with the exception of the employed veterinarian whose license is at risk and who can simply be replaced. This does not protect the public, and most importantly it does not protect pets! We used to be a nation and state of laws. Obedience to the law is a cornerstone of civil society.
I urge Mr. Crowe to go to to learn what percentage of donated money (not earned by Alabama taxpayers as in the privately owned clinics) actually goes to care of animals. Millions of dollars have been pumped into lobbying efforts to change our laws to allow non-compliant clinics to continue to function. Has anyone, including Mr. Crowe asked the obvious question, why? What about all the spays and neuters that existing, Alabama veterinarian-owned clinics and spay/neuter clinics, could have performed with all that revenue? If it were really about unwanted pets, or pet overpopulation, don't you think these groups would be funding programs with vouchers like the very effective and successful , which by the way was a means tested program.
Finally, I would like to close by saying that veterinarians in our great state have done a very good job in providing these services at very low costs for decades. Chances are if you see dead animals killed on our roads, it is probably wildlife. Now there is a good project for a nonprofit. But it would not provide large incomes and pensions for those that administer it.
Christopher J. Rehm Sr., D.V.M.
air jordan 11
jordan retro 13
cheap jordan shoes for kids
cheap petra jordan
cheap retro jordans